I'd contend edit/no edit and other interface options should depend on the vision the org has for the bbs.

If the org considered the bbs a worthwhile resource created by users with nominal guidance by the org wrt topic organization & etiquette & etc., and if the org trusted users to maintain it as such, allowing editing would be a no-brainer. This isn't strictly a conversation board. Sure, users chat here, and I think issues of honesty, impulsiveness and other etiquette matters wrt dialog would be much more important if it were strictly a chat board.

But because users also treat the eplaya as an opportunity to add to a persistent searchable archive of useful and illuminating contributions, and because users often get unexpected results dealing with phpbb's adaptation of hypertext in trying to post text with links and images, I think there's a strong argument to allow editing for at least a short time frame to avoid visual fuckups followed by a string of apologetic correction posts.

Having read through the thread, I still don't see compelling arguments that edit is useful for any other purpose than correcting spelling and grammar. Personally, especially in electronic mediums (email/IRC/BBS's) I totally overlook spelling and grammar mistakes, knowing that usually the person meant to spell that word properly. In IRC, we use the regex s/x/y/ syntax to correct [uneditable] posts only when the word used is incorrect or is confusing. Example:

Spanky> This is the way to do it.
Spanky> s/is/is not/

(read: substitute 'is' with 'is not')

I think IRC is the classic example of this. In IRC, you hit Enter and that's that. Your message is there in the channel. You can retype it better, you can s/x/y/ it, or you can explain it, apologize or whatever, but you can't go back and fix it. But, to me personally, Edit has so many more potential abuses than are justified by bringing it back to correct typos.

Nobody bothers with typos. We [mostly] know how to spell, and when typing quickly, one is apt to make typos. It's not crucial and I don't think anyone should get bent out of shape over typos or improper gerund use. Can't we all just be forgiving og the typing medium? (See I typed "og", but you all know I mean "of" and don't really think I think "og" is word.) Sure I'd like to go back and edit it, but why bother? Being a bit dyslexic, especially in the fingers, I ALWAYS spell working, wokring, I go to Bunring Man and I've just totally given up on spelling broken right....things just get borken and I have to fix them If you really care about spellling and grammar (which ARE important, don't get me wrong), take that extra minute to Preview and proofread.

My concern with Edit is CONTENT. Changing the dynamic of a conversation midstream, or worse, upstream. The problem with time delay is that reactions to an inflamatory thread can be quick and fierce. 30 minutes is a long time to go back and pull down your words. If anything, I like "edit most recent post unless responded to". This way, if you really must go fix "wokring", you have until someone responds to do so.

As I said before, I'm not going to block consensus, but I think a full agenda item at an F2F (or F2F+virtual) ETF meeting on this topic is in order, of course taking into account everything that has ben said in here. I will argue vehemently against it and concede to the consensus of the group.

FYI: Edit is not a MOD that needs to be installed. It's a pre-exiting setting. We just have to go change it in the ACP. Also, FYI, I left Edit & Delete "on" in the new Lost & Found forums.

We may want to look at Edit from a different perspective: maybe certain forums warrant it, and others do not? Like lost & found. I don't think heated arguments are going to erupt in there. Just someone mis-describing their item or having new information. Or when they've found said item, they can delete the thread?

I know mine is not a popular position (at least from reading this thread), but as I said in the 1st post, think of it as speech. Once it comes out of your mouth, there's no taking it back. Why should typing be any different. Own your words. If you want control over them, control them with your self-restraint and judgement before cliciking "submit".

There have been a few times I've wanted to turn to someone and say "Fuck you", but think about it and imagine I'd probably get fired (or punched out). So I don't say it. Doesn't mean I'm "censoring". Doesn't mean I would write it on a note and stick it to their door, then go back later and pull it down hoping they hadn't read it. I actively use reflexive thinking, self-restraint, consideration and weigh the outcome like a thinking adult. It puzzles me why that seems to be a concept that can suddenly be thrown out the window in this medium. <scratches head>

You're right, and, coincidentally, I provided even more opinions right after you posted! Ha!

Anyhow, when this whole thing was considered way back when, we had several examples happening right before our eyes. We had an ePlayan going back and replacing all of their posts with "Deleted" because they felt ganged up on and couldn't support their arguments. We had people editing posts from way back to counter arguments being placed against them in the now. Basically what we had was a bunch of edit shenanigans going on. I haven't read Badger's links to the Well, but I will now, as I am fascinated to see what other communities have done to deal with this issue.

We had to turn "edit" off on the Burning Man calendars because people were editing each other's posts, deleting posts they didn't like and such. Basically, in my experience, when given the option to fuck around by editing, someone will always start being a jerk and screw it up for everybody else. Yes, people may have screwed it up for everyone else, that certainly doesn't mean it won't happen again. Then we'll be right back where we started. All of the good users of "edit" aren't being punished, you're just being asked to be careful, considerate and prudent in your posting. Make sure you mean what you say and if you didn't, apologize and/or stand by and defend your position. If your words are misinterpreted, explain it, don't go back and edit.

spanky wrote:Nobody bothers with typos. We [mostly] know how to spell, and when typing quickly, one is apt to make typos. It's not crucial and I don't think anyone should get bent out of shape over typos or improper gerund use. Can't we all just be forgiving og the typing medium? (See I typed "og", but you all know I mean "of" and don't really think I think "og" is word.) Sure I'd like to go back and edit it, but why bother? Being a bit dyslexic, especially in the fingers, I ALWAYS spell working, wokring, I go to Bunring Man and I've just totally given up on spelling broken right....things just get borken and I have to fix them ;) If you really care about spellling and grammar (which ARE important, don't get me wrong), take that extra minute to Preview and proofread.

Note. I typo. Miswiresaurus rex is the awknowledged master.

The Lady with a Lamprey

"The powerful are exploiting people, art and ideas, and this leads to us plebes debating how to best ration ice.Man, no wonder they always win....." Lonesomebri

I am having a really hard time understanding the pushback on edit from eplaya. It isn't a matter of agreeing or disagreeing, it is a matter of not understanding.

You know what? I *MIGHT* want to go back and delete a bunch of posts I have made for reasons that don't have a THING to do with anything going on with eplaya.

Imagine I have just met someone and they piss me off and I happen to talk about that person a little here figuring they will never ever see it. Then a year later I discover I like the person and so let them into my life a little, maybe even tell them about eplaya. Now they go reading some stuff I wrote a year earlier that has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the current reality but causes a great big blowup and a shipload of drama. Trouble is, I can't go back and remove my own words written months ago ... why? Because ownership of my words was taken away. Once I hit the "submit" button here, I have transferred ownership of the words to BMorg and they are no longer mine.

While there might be an official policy of "own your words" in practice what actually happens is you loose ownership of your words. You are at the mercy of an admin to remove or change something. Again, a situation where policy has caused the board to be more labor intensive for the admins than it has to be.

If I am going to be forced to think of every single future context my words might be seen in before I hit "submit" and can not simply post what I feel, it might be a lot less enjoyable being here.

I will argue vehemently against it and concede to the consensus of the group.

does not jive with this:

If the consensus on Edit is not in my favor, I will not block it either. It's your boards!

With all due respect, I allowed to argue my opinion. If nobody agrees with me, I'll step off and make the changes you ask for. But I will do my best to make my voice heard. As I clearly, and repeatedly state, I will not block consensus. Maybe you need to review the consensus process. I will argue hard and I might even get a little angry, but I don't think there's anything with passionately believing in the principles behind your opinion. If Edit mus be, so be it, but not without a good fight from "my" camp.

There have been many solicitiations for people who want to contribute to the policy of this community to join the ETF. ETF meetings are usually announced on the board in advance and often open to the public via phone, IRC and webcast. If you want to have a voice, get involved. Not every decision is going to be made here by a body of 8000. Something that I've had to get used to here, is that I'm not invovled in every project and that sometime decsions get made without asking me or involving me, even though I am heavily involved in the topic. The ETF is an active, accountable and informed body, built to support maintain and foster this community. it is made up of people with expertise in electronic community, ePlaya community members (past and present), board & LLC members. Unless you get directly invovled (read: Participate in the formal process) the best you can do is make your opinions known here in this unofficial forum and hope that your opinion pervails in official decisions.

This is not to put an them vs. us mentality, but not everyone gets to decide what the Man platform is going to look like each year, even though we are all members of the Burning Man community. We are soliciting feedback, but, the Board does not go ask all 30,000 ticket holders where the porta potties should be located. Sure, they may ask for feedback, but at some point, a group of informed people need to sit and make a decision. We invite you into this process.

This may be very unpopular, but it's the truth. We do our best to be inclusive, consider all sides and reach consensus, it's not always pleasant. I have my opinion and I'm allowed to argue and represent it. It also doesn't mean that I wont consider the viewpoints of others. <looks around for support> AG, back my up on the consensus process!

geekster wrote:Because ownership of my words was taken away. Once I hit the "submit" button here, I have transferred ownership of the words to BMorg and they are no longer mine.

While there might be an official policy of "own your words" in practice what actually happens is you loose ownership of your words.

The Burning Man Project has no desire to own your words. You own your words and can go do with them as you wish. The Project is allowed to re-use your words (see ToS) if we want, say for promotion (I can't imagine this, but for example). When I say "own your words", maybe I should be clearer and say "stand by what you said". Once you hit submit, you don't lose control of them, you lose the ability to erase them or take them back. You lose the ability to change history.

Please keep in mind, this is MY opinion. You can all gang up and argue against me, but I firmly believe this and I don't think you're gonna change my mind. What you're going to have to do is build consensus against me, which I fully support.

AGAIN: I will not "veto" or block consensus if edit is asked for, and I will do my best to find and install any necessary tools to make it happen in the way that is agreed on. I may not be happy about the decision, but that's too bad for me.

I am having trouble understanding what *exactly* you mean by "consensus." Could you please define it in terms of who and how many?

The tone of your posts and statements like:

If nobody agrees with me...

are giving me the feeling that you will only implement this in the face of overwhelming or unanimous opposition both within the community and ETF.

What "consensus" are we looking for? You put up a poll, -it speaks volumes. The thread commentary is similarly one-sided in favor of edit. Is this one of those things were you ask for input that only coincides with a predetermined course?

You are not "one voice", Spanky. You are the one in charge of the final decision. Please do not portray us as equals in this. You have already displayed a desire to ignore the majority of single voices in favor of those who make the "official decisions." If I want to have a voice I have to "get involved?" I'll get involved with the ETF if you get involved with feeding, schooling and otherwise rearing my children. M'kay? We have different lives and only so many hours in a day. Don't equate "volunteering" with "caring" or being able to contribute.

If that is the way things are cut, that's fine, but if so, it is obvious that it's *YOUR* board -not OURS.

As I was saying, my opinion differs from yours. IF the consensus on the matter is to reimplement edit, I will do so. I have every right to argue my position and I will do like the Leo that I am. I encourage you to rally support around a differing opinion than mine. It's what debate is all about! I especially don't want to ram my opinions down an entire community's throat! I've been there and still feel the effects years later. Just keep in mind, you can attack my ideas, but don't attack me personally. I'm just of a different mind than you on this topic!

Don Muerto wrote:You are the one in charge of the final decision. Please do not portray us as equals in this.

You uare so totally wrong on this. I do not have final say in anything nor do I pretend to. This is a role and position you have imagined and placed on me. I am the implementor. I do the work decided by the group. I will argue my opinion on principle. I do not have the power, nor would I want it, to say "No, I WON'T do it". I would expect to be run out on a rail. I just believe this is a subject that is important enough to bring all of the involved parties from the ETF in on.

As usual, in an ETF meeting, we will have conference calls, webcasts, IRC and an agenda. I usually ask all members to familiarize themselves with the threads pertaining to the topic at hand (Edit), and if you want your voice heard, be sure to post (as you've done) in this thread, and do your best to attend, either in person or virtually. I promise you will not be excluded from the process.

I'm sorry that you, and I hope you alone, think that I am holding the keys or that I have final say. You couldn't be farther from correct.

Perhaps some definition or illustration of that threshold or tipping point would be helpful?

Well, since we don't vote, it's hard to define a "tipping point". It would be after a formal meeting discussion on the matter over pizza. We always have pizza. Maybe this time we'll have chinese. I guess I should start scheduling the meeting sooner than later so we can be done with it. I really don't want to have to keep arguing the point that I'm not blocking the decision, it just seems that nobody wants to hear an argument that doesn't agree with their own? I have and continue to carefully consider the issue. I know that the ETF already came to consensus on this issue a ways back which is why things are as they are now.

If people want to continue to attack me for my opinions, feel free to do so, but your energy could be much more effective by going out and finding case studies to back up your views. I am looking now to find examples and documents to back up my position, why don't you guys do the same instead of attacking me. I'm not the one who stands in your way! I just disagree, that seems to be unnacceptable.

How can you possibly argue that a poll that consists of only 25 poeple "speaks volumes?"

I have yet to hear one decent piece of evidence to support a dummy button. And please do worry that someone may read your words in the future and be offended. It's called responsibility. Earn it - know it - live it.

Nightterror, please stop personalizing the issue by inserting your imaginings of who I am into the argument. This is the third time you have done it and the second time I am asking you to stop.

Trust me when I say I have formed opinions about you too, but neither are germaine to whether this forum should include an edit feature, so let's leave them out of the mix. Agreed?

Thus far you have only stated a philosophy, and presented zero evidence that it is borne out in practice. I have shown that your philosophy does not translate into practice, but you chose to devolve that conversation into some time-hopping, second-guessing, logically unsound personal melodrama. More's the pity.

Answer these questions:

* How many posts do you estimate are simply post-typo corrections that exist because the inability to edit forces clarification in a subsequent post?

* Do these posts "add value" to the forum beyond the clarification they provide which would be available via edit otherwise?

The philosophies that people shouldn't make mistakes, or should not correct mistakes, or will post more carefully without an edit-net just isn't borne out in practice.

I do own my words and am responsible for them -even when I have edited them.

How can you possibly argue that a poll that consists of only 25 poeple "speaks volumes?"

I have yet to hear one decent piece of evidence to support a dummy button. And please do worry that someone may read your words in the future and be offended. It's called responsibility. Earn it - know it - live it.

Fine, if this forum is to be considered a book, with everything written herein cast in stone for posterity, fine. And I wasn't taling about being irresponsible either. I am saying that things change and what might be completely responsible one year in one context could be completely disasterous in another year in a different context. I am also talking about something that might be taken to mean something completely different than was ment in another time and being unable to modify/clarify.

And, I suppse what gets me most of all is an attitude that the posters here must be treated like children and not be given too many tools lest they begin using them. We musn't let them run with scissors! They might hurt themself or poke a hole in the couch. And the quite honestly, the longer these "discussions" drag on, the less inclined I am to participate. I feel like I must convince someone that I can act like an adult and I find it a little patronizing.

Don Muerto wrote:* How many posts do you estimate are simply post-typo corrections that exist because the inability to edit forces clarification in a subsequent post?

See my post about typo-forgiveness.

Don Muerto wrote:* Do these posts "add value" to the forum beyond the clarification they provide which would be available via edit otherwise?

No, they don't. I also think people needn't repost to correct typos unless they obscure the calrity of a post, in which case a clarification is totally in order and does add value.

Don Muerto wrote:The philosophies that people shouldn't make mistakes, or should not correct mistakes, or will post more carefully without an edit-net just isn't borne out in practice.

I don't think people shouldn't make mistakes, but those mistakes, especially if it's just spelling or grammar, don't warrant edit. In my experience, edit only becomes a concern that I give a shit about when it gets used by asshats to fuck around. Since this seems to happen, this is the only reason I feel strongly about it at all. If everyone played nice, we'd'a never turned it off!! If people make big mistakes in their posts (like social mistakes, or attacks or whatever) I think it should stand and the learning process can begin in full view. If after the learning (or public-corrective process) has completed, would one then go back to change their initial post at which point the rest of the conversation then looks totally bizarre or out of context?

Don Muerto wrote:I do own my words and am responsible for them -even when I have edited them.

And it's not you that I have concerns about. I like your contentious spirit. It's like criminals. It's not the law-abiders that laws are meant for. It's the criminals who just suck ass that the laws and jails are for.

I'm sitting here reading this debate and I've found nothing compelling to change my opinion that limited edit is that bad.

Spanky, here's a technical side question about the limits of PHBPP's edit functions. What options are available to us? Is it as simple as you either turn it on or off? Can we set a timer, set it to allow edit until the next post hits (not a good thing in a fast environment)....what kinds of flexiblity does the software give us to work with?

I also liked the point in one of your arguments about not everyone gets to determine what the base of the man looks like, etc. I mention this because if turning something on means the server could be made unstable or subject to excessive load, then you or whomever runs the boxes should have the right to say no and be done with it. Not everything should be run by committee, it's nice to have options and be able to pick things but at the end of the day sometimes you have to look at what's needed to keep the dang thing running smoothly and get on with it. Priority one is keeping things operational, anything else is icing on the cake.

The inability to edit enfoces a certain stasis I might be, as a growing and changing being, unwilling to accept. I might find that I no longer hold positions on issues or opinions on topics that I once held. In fact, I tend to take a little secret personal pride in the fact that I can be moved by good argument on many things and that there often is no one blanket solution for every circumstance. I quite often find myself making exceptions in judgement in particular circumstances that are counter to my general position. Why should I want who I was a year or two or three ago to be tossed in my face when I have grown from that position?

I can see having capability reduced to limit damage when one has shown themself to be damaging but reduction of capability for prophylactic reasons seems unnecessarily constraining to me.

Nobody bothers with typos. We [mostly] know how to spell, and when typing quickly, one is apt to make typos. It's not crucial and I don't think anyone should get bent out of shape over typos or improper gerund use. Can't we all just be forgiving og the typing medium?

I disagree. Lots of people bother with typos. Sometimes a simple typo can change the word, which can change the entire meaning of a sentence.

Yes, I can be forgiving of your typing errors. Can you be forgiving of my desire to have the ability to correct my posts? They should be given equivalent weight, imo.

Also, while I think that there are topics over which the etf should have dominion, I think that when what we're discussing is usability/user interface preferences, that the opinions expressed by users of the board should be given more weight.

Tancorix wrote:Spanky, here's a technical side question about the limits of PHBPP's edit functions. What options are available to us? Is it as simple as you either turn it on or off? Can we set a timer, set it to allow edit until the next post hits (not a good thing in a fast environment)....what kinds of flexiblity does the software give us to work with?

There appears to be a time-driven MOD that allows eidintg, forum wide on some sort of criteria. I'd have to go back and re-read, 'cuz my feeble brain forgets things every day at 4:20.

Tancorix wrote:if turning something on means the server could be made unstable or subject to excessive load, then you or whomever runs the boxes should have the right to say no and be done with it

Edit or the MOD'd forms of edit would not impact the server load or stability in any way. I do reserver the right to veto things that are technologically unsound. Like using phpBB at all So, there is no technical reason not to use edit. It is purely a social thing. (Which makes me wonder why I'm arguing at all)

Tiara wrote:Sometimes a simple typo can change the word, which can change the entire meaning of a sentence.

and for this, if you read above, is a subsequent post that add value to the board because it clarifies. Remember, I'm with you on edit - I think you should be able to edit for purposes of spelling etc. I just have seen in the past it get abused and I don't think typos/grammar warrant edit. The only thing I can think of is that, like, you can only edit a certain percentage of a post, like 5%. (Like this would be possible!)

I don't know. I wish there weren't asshats out there, then I'd turn edit on and we'd all be happy. I'd also like to not have a big metal gate on my stoop and not have to unlock my house everytime I come home, but if I leave it unlocked long enough, some fucker's gonna come in and steal my shit when I'm not home. As it is, people have broken into my house when it WAS locked. I draw the parallel. 99% (and that's optimistic) of people are good, it's the 1% that ruin it for everyone. I think the answer (to both problems) starts with the education system and parenting, but I don't think the ePlaya is going to help solve either of those social problems.